Thursday, July 5, 2018

Thursday, November 10, 2016

If you are really interested in reducing the number of unwanted cats, please take the time to read this entire article and then be prepared to take action based on the best evidence.

-->

Evidence-based strategies for saving cats:

an
Australian perspective

Jacquie Rand

Professor of Companion
Animal Health

School of Veterinary Science,
University of Queensland

How big is the problem in Australia?

Approximately 7 cats /1000 human residents enter shelters and
pounds around Australia annually based on 2012-13 data, and the death rate
varies between states from 3 to 7 cats/1000 residents (Chua and Rand,
unpublished data). This compares with a dog intake of 10 dogs/1000 residents
and deaths of 2 dogs/1000 residents. Approximately 170,000 cats enter shelters
and pounds annually in Australia, with 27% found new homes (compared with 19% of
dogs), 6% transferred (compared with 7% of dogs), but only 4.5% are reclaimed
by the owner, compared to 48% of dogs, resulting in an average euthanasia rate across
Australian shelters and pounds of 56% for cats compared to 21% for dogs. It is estimated that the cost to the community
is approximately $250 million a year to manage unwanted cats and dogs in
shelters and council pounds (Albertson et
al, 2013).

Being
unwanted kills pets more than disease. As a community, how can we best respond to a situation that is responsible for
the death of so many cats annually? Reducing shelter intake is the most
effective way of reducing euthanasia, and 9 strategies are proposed that would
save cat lives in shelters and pounds.

Strategy 1:
Transparency of shelter and pound performance

Facts supporting the strategy

The RSPCA has state and national data available on their
website, the Lost Dogs Home has data available in their annual report (on
website), and the Animal Welfare League (Qld) has data on website, but many
other welfare agencies do not have data readily available to the public.
Publically available data for individual council pound performance is only available
in Victoria, and are listed on each council website under their Dog and Cat
Management Plan. NSW has combined data for the whole state available through
the Department of Premier and Cabinet, but individual council data are not
available. The SA Dog and Cat Management Board publishes on their website
combined data for councils in their annual report, but this does not include
numbers euthanased. They also have combined data for councils and animal
welfare agencies, but this is not on the website, and confidentiality
agreements prevent release of individual agency data. There is no other states
currently with data available publically. Double counting of intake occurs in
most states, and occurs when councils have contracts with animal welfare
agencies and both report the same animals as intake (Chua and Rand, unpublished data).

Why would transparency make a difference?

Transparency is important for two reasons. Firstly, how do
you know where you want to be, if you do not know where you currently are, or
where you were? And how do you estimate resources needed, and where they need
to be directed, if, as a community, you do not know where performance is
optimal, and where it is suboptimal and costing lives?

Secondly, there are numerous examples where public knowledge
of the poor outcome for impounded animals has resulted in public pressure and
involvement in the community, resulting in the shelter or pound embracing
practices which save lives. The power of people to initiate change is well
recognised, and transparency together with community edutcation has the
potential to save more lives than most other strategies.

Recommendation:

1.In all states and territories, a government-mandated
cat (and dog) management plan is publically available on every council website
which includes key data such as intake, reclaim, re-home, transfers,
euthanased, and foster/in care. This is similar to the Victorian model, but
includes more reporting categories for outcome. It should also indicate what
pound functions are outsourced and to whom.

2.There is also mandated transparency for animal
welfare agencies with reporting of the same categories of outcome data as
required for councils and this is made available annually on their website or
other publically available documents.

3.There is also centralized data collection at the
State level that is readily accessible to the public, and facilitates
identification of where best practice is occurring, and where more resources
are required. This data should include data for each council and animal
welfare agency, as well as combined statistics for the state which do not
include any double counting of animals.

Surrender reasons
provided to the RSPCA for owner-surrendered cats indicated that 87% of adult
cats and 95% of kittens were surrendered for owner-related reasons, rather than
cat-related reasons. Behavioural reasons accounted for 7% of adult cat
surrenders and 1% of kittens (Albertson et
al, 2013, 2014). Failure to find cat-friendly accommodation was stated as
the primary reason for 36% of adult cat
surrenders, although only one reason was allowed.

Lack of pet friendly accommodation
results in approximately 9000 adult cats and 2200 kittens, becoming homeless and
surrendered to the RSPCA annually. If this is extrapolated to other animal welfare
agencies and council pounds, the number is approximately 30,000-40,000 a year, and
half the cats die as a result of their owner being unable to find pet-friendly
accommodation.

Recommendation:

Government–mandated legislation
against discrimination of pets in
rental or owned accommodation should be implemented because it would save cat
(and dog) lives.

Strategy 3: Desexing

Facts supporting a
desexing strategyfor owned cats

More than half the cats entering
shelters are kittens. Of cats entering RSPCA shelters nationally between
2006-2010, 47% were adult and 53% were kittens (Alberthson et al, 2013, and Alberthson, 2014). Of adults, 47% were owned, and
53% stray. In contrast for kittens, 38% were from owned queens, and 62% were stray.Importantly, strategies targeting owned cats
are ineffective for stray cats.

In USA, approximately 68% of
litters are unplanned (New et al., 2000),
and reasons given included prohibitive cost of desexing or the inconvenience,
cat had undetected heat, owner thought kitten was too young, or the owner
believed a litter was good for the cat or kids. When owners were asked the
question, was a cat better off if she has one litter before being 'fixed', 57%
did not know the correct answer (Scarlett, 2008) .

Although
a high percentage of owned cats are desexed in Australia ( > 90%), 30-70% are not sterilized before 6 to 12 months, and 12-20% in
Australia and USA have a litter before being desexed (Toukhsati, Bennett et al. 2007, Marsh 2010). For
example, in a Western Australian study of cats presented for discounted microchipping
in 2012 and 2013, only 49% and 28% of cats respectively, under 2 years old were
desexed, whereas 93% and 97% of cats aged at least 2 years were desexed
(Johnson et al, 2014). This consistent
with the finding that while most owned cats in Australia are eventually
desexed, for many cats, it is performed too late to prevent at least one litter
of kittens being produced.

Strategies are needed to reduce
this 'spey delay' in owned queens, with the message that having a litter is not
good for the cat, not good for the kids, the kitten is not too young by 8 weeks
of age, and that desexing cats at < 5 months results in better heath and
behaviour compared to > 5 months (Spain et
al, 2004).

What is more effective - government-mandated desexing, or
targeted desexing to areas of high intake and euthanasia?

Facts supported mandated desexing

ACT has mandated desexing of all
dogs and cats by 6 months of age. However, when national RSPCA data were
analysed, ACT had the lowest prevalence of desexing of kittens (< 6 months
of age) admitted to shelters of all states (3%), but had the second highest
percentage of desexed adult cat admissions, although this represented only 61% of
all adult admissions (stray and owned), and 81% owned-surrenderedadults.This suggests owners eventually comply, but it is too late to prevent a
litter.If desexing is mandated, for two
reasons, it would likely be most effective if it was by 4 months of age.
Firstly, kittens can reach puberty by 16 weeks of age, and secondly, it encourages
veterinarians to include desexing in the initial health program for cats - vaccinate, vaccinate and “book in for spey 2
weeks later”, rather than “call us in 2 months”, which may result in cat owners
not getting around to desexing before the cat is pregnant.

However, there are several challenges.
Currently, most veterinarians are not trained in early-aged desexing (8-16
weeks of age), only a small minority of veterinary staff in universities
teaching desexing advocate it for client-owned cats (Jupe et al, unpublished data), and it typically requires an additional
week of student training in surgery to gain skills in early-age desexing, which
is very costly, at a time most veterinary schools in Australia have budget deficits.
Animal welfare agencies need to partner with veterinary schools to provide
training in early-age desexing to undergraduate veterinary students so they
graduate with competency in early-age desexing.

Mandated licensing of cat breeders
and mandated desexing of cats from breeders is unlikely to be cost-effective in
reducing shelter intake and euthanasia, given that pure-bred cats represent
only minority of owned cats (Headey, 2006), and only 5% of cat admissions and
3% of cats euthanased in RSPCA shelters nationally are purebred (Alberthson et al, 2013, and Alberthson, 2014),

Importantly, mandated desexing is
ineffective for reducing the 60% of kittens that come from unowned queens.

Stray
kittens comprise approximately 60% of kitten intake and 90% display some
socializationto humans, with only 10%
classed as feral. These kittens are likely coming from semi-owned cats which
are provided some care, usually food, by people who do not perceive they own
them. This public behaviour is common – for example, in a phone survey in Victoria,
33% of phone respondents said they owned a cat, but 22% fed a cat that was not
their own (Toukhsati,
Bennett & Coleman, 2007).
Similar statistics were found in South Australia and USA where 27% and 25% of
households respectively, feed a cat they do not perceive they own. In Ireland, the
practice was equally as common as owning a cat (11% of population). The population
of ‘semi-owned” cats is estimated to be equal to 2/3rds of the owned cat
population. However, in contrast to owned cats, only 20% of these semi-owned
cats were desexed (Toukhsati,
Bennett & Coleman, 2007).
Therefore,
cats fed by people who do not perceive they own them are a very significant
source of kittens and cats.

Strategies to prevent
unwanted kittens fromunownedqueens require addressing the
behaviours ofpeople who feed cats but do not take ownership. Approximately
59% of people surrendering a stray cat have been providing care for more than 1
month, so have some relationship with the cat (Zito et al, 2015). Social marketing messages targeted to change
attitudes and behavior are required, with a clear message that desexing is
important to prevent kittens been born to die. Opportunities for desired
behavior need to be provided, and evidence from USA suggests that people who do
not perceive ownership will pay a maximum of $20 for desexing.

Shelters and pounds
generally collect data on the postcodes where cats and kittens entering the
shelter originated.These can be used to
focus the desexing programs where they would be most effective, that is, in areas contributing to high
intake and euthanasia. To reduce the “kitten tsunami”, and stop last summer’s kittens
producing next summer’s kittens, desexing programs should begin from
April and continue through winter and spring.

What is the evidence that targeted desexing works?

San Jose
reported a 50% drop in cat shelter admissions using spey/neuter voucher program
and calculated that the net savings to the county was $1.5 million over 4
years. (Kass PH, et al 2013).

Recommendation

Based on the data from ACT, mandated desexing does not
appear to be very effective (Alberthson 2014), and given that any legislative
change is costly (it may exceed $1million), this may not be the most
cost-effective strategy. Responsible owners have their cats desexed without
legislation, laisse faire owners do
not, however, they also may not comply with legislation, and mandatory desexing
legislation is not effective for people who do not perceive themselves as cat
owners, although they are providing some care for a cat. Targeted desexing for
cats has been shown to be effective, and without more evidence, the
recommendation is to put resources into targeted desexing. Any combination of
low-cost desexing clinics run by animal welfare agencies, desexing through
participating veterinary clinics (subsidized by government and animal welfare
agencies), and mobile vans run by animal welfare agencies are likely to be
effective. If existing surgery facilities do not exist in the animal welfare
agency, coopting existing veterinary clinics may the most cost-effective,
because the building and surgery suites already exist, and cat owners develop a
relationship with the veterinarian for ongoing health issues.Blacktown council’s experience was that $100
spent in the community subsidizing desexing for dogs, saved the council $200
from reducing dog entry into the pound (per comm Norm Blackman).

Ideally, mandated and targeted desexing could be trialed
and compared in comparable councils and against a control council, to better
evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the two strategies in Australian conditions.

Strategy 4: Confinement to property

Facts supporting the
strategy

Because 35% of adult strays, and 42% of adult council
admissions are desexed, it is likely that likely many of these are owned-cats are
wanderers. Owners delay longer looking for their lost cat compared to dog owners.
In USA, the average time to call or visit an animal control agency was 1 day
for dogs, compared to 3 days cats (Lord
et al., 2007).However, the minimum holding period for
cats is 3 days in many Australian states. Strategies which keep cats on their owner’s
property will help to keep cats safe. What if every owned cat was confined on the
owner’s property – would there be as many stray cats euthanased in
shelters and pounds?Various options exist including relatively
inexpensive cat-proof fencing and invisible electronic fencing. These methods
of containment maintain environmental enrichment and physical activity, which
24 hour confinement in the home does not, and home confinement predisposes to
obesity and diabetes (Sloth, 1994; Robertson, 1999; Scarlett et al, 1994; 1998). Keeping Cats
Safe and Good Cats Play at Home booklets
are a good source of information (Council
of the City of Gold Coast), and the Victorian Department of
Environment and Primary Industries cat confinement link (http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/pets/cats/cat-confinement-enclosures-and-fencing).

Recommendation

To prevent adult cats straying and keep them safe, it is recommended that cats be
confined to the owner’s property. Mandated containment should be trialed and
evaluated in selected areas, and the cost-effectiveness compared with a
voluntary system of incentives or subsidies, combined with appropriate social
marketing messages to increase uptake.

Strategy 5: Identification

Facts supporting the
strategy

Approximately 14% of dog and 15% of cat owners in
USA lose their pet at least once in a 5 year period (Weiss, 2012), and41% of lost cats were “indoor only” (Lord et al., 2007). Although 76% of owned dogs and 64% owned
cats in Australia are microchipped (Animal
Health Alliance,2013), only 9% of
stray cats and 28% of stray dogs entering RSPCA Qld in 2012-2013 were microchipped
(Lancaster et al., 2015). However,
37% of animals entering RSPCA Qld with microchips had data problems with the
microchip - 47% were still registered to previous owner or organization, 29% had
phone numbers that were incorrect or disconnected, and 14% were not registered
to a data base –although it is compulsory for the implanter to register the
chip within 7 days (Lancaster et al.,
2015). The percentage of animals
reclaimed decreased significantly between microchipped animals with no data
problems, animals microchipped with problems, and animals with no microchip. Of
stray cats, 61% with no problems, 33% with data problems, and 5% with no microchip
were reclaimed. Importantly, cats with
no data problems had 31 times higher odds of being reclaimed than those with no
microchip.However, only 13% of reclaimed cats from
RSPCA had a microchip (Alberthson et al.,
2013 ), suggesting that microchipping is not a major factor in the reclaim
of stray cats.

Currently, there is no legal requirement for a
previous owner or organisation to transfer ownership to the new owner, and 47%
of microchips with data problems were still registered to previous owner or
organization. Would legislation requiring the previous owner to complete change of microchip details be
effective? Could a process similar to car registration transfer, where the
seller provides the buyer with the paperwork needed for ownership transfer, and
both parties keep a copy increase currency of microchip details?

Recommendations

Mandatory
identification does not appear to be very effective because only 28% of stray
dogs and 8% of stray cats entering RSPCA Qld were microchipped, despite it
being a legal requirement, and 37% of these animals had problems with the data
recorded on the data base (Lancaster et
al, 2015), It is likely that an annual “Microchip Awareness Month” with provision
of low- cost community microchipping locations, which also make it easy to
check and update owner details, would be a more effective strategy for
increasing accuracy of microchip data, rather than legislation that requires
database information be changed at the point of sale or give-away. However, if the
cost of changing the legislation was minimal, implementation of both strategies
would likely be better than either one alone. Social marketing messages about
how to check for the presence of a microchip and how to update contact details,
could also be trialled to determine the cost-effectiveness. Microchip database
companies should also be encouraged to send regular reminders to clients to
update details, for example using text messages or emails providing a reminder
and a link to update details. There are also opportunity for Australia Post and
energy companies to provide a community service by asking people when they move
and get electricity connected, if they would like their contact details to be
updated with their pet’s microchip database company.

Strategy 6: Education of pound &
shelter managers on best practice

Facts supporting the
strategy

Some council pounds in Australia kill 80 to 90% cats, and
others 7%. There are many examples from USA and some from Australia (eg RSPCA
at Wacol, AWL Gold Coast), where introducing a range of strategies to reduce
intake and increase live release has had marked impact in reducing euthanasia.
For example, Jacksonville Animal Control received 34,000 animals and killed
23,000, but 10 years later, after a name change to Jacksonville Animal Care and
Protection, and introducing a range of strategies aimed at reducing intake and
increasing adoptions, only 2,000 animals were euthanased. However, many shelter
and pound managers are unware of strategies that can markedly reduce
euthanasia.

For example, many council pounds have little or no
foster programs, which could be organised with the assistance of the community.
Similarly, transferring to rescue groups and animal welfare agencies could be
better utilized by most councils with poor outcome data. Although council
pounds have a requirement to take in animals, they could engage surrendering
owners to help find a solution for their pet, such as finding a new home or
participating in behavioural training classes for their cat. Similarly, assisting
people to find a solution for a semi-owned cat would decrease intake, which has
a powerful effect on decreasing euthanasia. At Jacksonsville, asking people if
they would hold the animal until a place became available, and in the meantime
consider keeping it or finding a home for it, resulted in approximately 30% of
people taking their animal home again (per
comm Rick DuCharme, FCNMHP). For animal welfare agencies which are not
required to take in all animals, limiting intake to only the number that can be
cared for dramatically reduces euthanasia, for example, RSPCA Qld Wacol. Erie
SPCA put all people surrendering stray cats on a wait list, which dramatically
decreased intake because with counselling, 14% of people decided to keep the
cat and 45% found a new home for it, resulting in no treatable stray cats being
euthanased. Other strategies aimed at keeping animals in their home can be
utilized such as a food bank for those who cannot afford pet food, behavior
counseling, general counseling on solutions for their pet, assistance finding
affordable pet-friendly housing, and assistance with affordable health care.

Strategies which make it easier to adopt a pet, and increased
advertising so the shelter or pound is viewed as the preferred source for a pet,
have been used successfully in a number of shelters including Jacksonville. Subsidized spey-neuter programs, targeted
for location and time of year, and with cost limited to less than $20 if the
cat is unowned, reduces entry and therefore, euthanasia. Reduced entry, reduces
the number of cats in the shelter, which assists in reducing the number of cats
getting sick in shelters and pounds, and subsequently being euthanased.

For people
wanting to surrender a cat, provide the outcome of a quick adoptability test on
entry, and use it to inform the surrenderer of the realistic chance of rehoming
of their pet, based on assessment of its behaviour, health, and cuteness.
Because more than half the stray cats entering RSPCA shelters are fed for 1
month or more by the surrenderer (Zito et
al., unpublished), many of these people have an attachment to the cat, and
if informed of the high likelihood of euthanasia, they may be more engaged to
find an alternative solution for the cat.

Fast tracking
the most adoptable cats will save lives - as quickly as possible put the most
adoptable cats into the adoption pool, because this is proven to increase total
number adopted and decrease the number euthanased - even for cats that are
difficult to rehome. Increasing rehoming opportunities increases the number of
animals adopted, for example, through petshops, and special adoption events,
potentially held in conjunction with other community events that attract animal
lovers such as agricultural or horse shows, polo events etc. In addition,
special promotions of reduced price adoptions are associated with increased
adoptions, without increased risk of subsequent surrender (Zito et al, 2015).

There a
number of other strategies which decrease intake and increase live release, and
these are often more effective when shelters, pounds, rescue groups and
communities all work together to save animals (Million Cat Challenge).

Recommendations

Shelter and pound managers should be required to undertake annual
continuing education on shelter management practices that improve outcomes for
animals, such as national (eg. G2Z) and international conferences and webinars
(eg. HSU, ASPCA, Maddies, Best Friends).

Strategy 7: Shelter, Neuter and Return
to Field

Facts supporting the
strategy

Stray adult cats are a heterogeneous
population, and have the worst live release statistics in shelters and pounds.
They comprise lost but owned cats, semi-owned cats, and feral cats. The following findings should be considered
when considering strategies for lost, owned adult cats. Cats are3 times more
likely to “disappear” from household than dogs, and only approximately 4% of cats
are reclaimed from shelters and pounds across Australia (Chua unpublished,
Alberthson et al., 2013, 2014).In a US study, 66% of lost cats were found
because they returned home and only 7% of lost cats were found via a call or
visit to shelter. Cats are at least 13 times more likely to return home by
non-shelter means than by shelter means. Most owned cats that have strayed are
within 5 houses of their owner.

Free-living
cats are no less healthy than pet cats, and have ideal body condition (not obese)
(Scott et al., 2002). Less than 1% of
100,000 free-living stray and feral cats trapped in trap-neuter and return
programs were deemed too unhealthy to be returned to the field, and were
euthanased as a result of debilitating conditions, trauma or infectious disease
(Wallace et al, 2006, Million Cat
Challenge).

For
adult feral cats

Trapping
to kill is not the solution to decrease numbers of unowned cats and kittens. It
is ineffective and costly. The cost of eradicating cats from Australia would
exceed $1.5 trillion and is greater than the Australian GDP, so is clearly
unaffordable and impractical. Money spent by councils trapping and killing is largely
ineffective, because only a small of the population (typically 2-5%) is killed,
whereas for effective population control this would have to increase to 50% or
more.Importantly, low-level culling of
feral cats in Tasmania has been shown to increase cat numbers rather than
decrease them (Lazenby, 2014). A more effective strategy is to identify areas
of high value with endangered wildlife, and fence these off and remove all
introduced pest species. Removal of only cats may not be beneficial to the
environment if other introduced species are present such as rats, rabbits and
foxes. For example on Macquarie Island, where cats initially were removed, it had
a worse environmental effect, because of the marked increase of the rabbit
population (Bergstrom et al., 2009). Similarly,
in New Zealand, following eradication of cats from Little Barrier Island,
Pacific rat numbers increased, with a subsequent increase in predation of
seabirds by rats

Evidence
that shelter, neuter and return works

In shelter-neuter and return programs for stray cats, only medically untreatable cats
are euthanased. Cats which are not adopted and would otherwise be euthanased,
are neutered, ear-tipped, ideally microchipped, and returned to within 300
meters of capture. Information to advise neighbours on the release program should
be distributed to houses in the vicinity, and contain information on how to
contact the shelter if there were concerns about the released cat. In the San
Jose animal shelter in USA, over the 4 years after shelter-neuter and release
was implemented, kitten and cat intake decreased 29% and euthanasia decreased
from 70% to 23%, with 96.6% of healthy stray/feral cats saved (10,080 cats). Euthanasia
in the shelter from upper respiratory disease declined 99%, and dead cat pick
up off streets declined 20%. During the same period there was no change in dog
intake or euthanasia statistics.

However, shelter-neuter
and return is illegal in Australia because unowned cats are considered pests,
and it is illegal to release a pest species, because they are perceived as having
an adverse effect on wildlife. Nevertheless, cats can have negative, neutral or positive effect
on native wildlife, depending on location, and the presence of other predators,
especially introduced species such as rats and rabbits.

Currently, no study
in suburban Australia has demonstrated a negative effect of cats on native
wildlife population. A Perth study investigated native mammal diversity across
3 bushland sites, which for >10 years had either banned cats, required cats to
be kept inside overnight and to wear a bell, and one site had no regulations
regarding cats. Numbers of the most abundant medium-sized mammals (brushtail
possums and southern brown bandicoots) were similar across all sites. A smaller
mardo Antechinus flavipes, which is highly susceptible to cat predation,
was most abundant at the unregulated cat site. The conclusions from this study
were that owned cats adjacent to bushland were not having a negative effect on
native mammals, and that density of vegetation was likely positive factor in
determining mammal density (Grayson, Calver & Lymbery, 2007).

In Albany,
New York, USA, they compared the density of domestic cats roaming in a suburban
nature reserve with small mammal density and biodiversity, and found no link
between cat density and local small animal abundance or biodiversity (Kays
& DeWan, 2004).

A
study of 57 sites across metropolitan Perth investigated factors effecting
passerine bird community composition (eg. magpies, blackbirds) and found no
link between cat density and passerine bird species richness.Importantly, decreasing bird population was
found with increasing housing density, and with increasing distance from
bushland, leading the authors to conclude that habitat destruction and
degradation were the critical factors in decreasing density and diversity of
passerine birds, and not cats (Grayson, 2007 ).

In a current UQ study, we are asking what owners of dogs and cats observe their pets catch over a 6
month period. Preliminary data suggest that dogs and cats caught more mammals
than birds, reptiles, or amphibians, and that cats overwhelmingly catch mice, followed
by rats and then rabbits (M. Franklin et
al unpublished data). The preliminary findings are consistent with
Macquarie Island data, where cats had a positive effect on wildlife because of
introduced rabbits. More data are required for this survey, so please complete
it by clicking on the following link:https://au1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_6lBLXsQ8oN1EjGJor
type into the address bar: http://tinyurl.com/pgay346

Two
studies from Europe (UK, France) found birds killed by cats were less healthy
than birds killed by cars or flying into windows, and both authors concluded
that cats are opportunist hunters and tend to remove sick, old, and birds which
have fallen out of the nest, rather than healthy birds (Baker et al., 2008 and Møller &
Erritzøe, 2000).

The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
issued a statement that
“despite the large numbers of birds killed, there is no scientific evidence
that predation by cats in gardens is having any impact on bird populations U.K-wide.
It is likely that most of the birds killed by cats would have died anyway from
other causes before the next breeding season, so cats are unlikely to have a
major impact on populations.”(Vox Felina, 2012).

Is it
justified killing stray cats when this might not have any beneficial effect on
native wildlife?

Recommendation

Is there a
council interested in a research project to evaluate the effect on native
wildlife of a program where stray cats that would have been killed are desexed
and released? What if we planted two native plants for each cat released?
Please contact Jacquie Rand, j.rand@uq.edu.au if interested in this project.

Strategy 8: Trap, Neuter & Return
(TNR)

Facts supporting the
strategy

In Montana, TNR
resulted in a 36% decline in cat intake, a 87% decline in euthanasia, and a

84% decline in cat-related complaint calls. In Texas,
there was a 90% decline in cat-related complaint calls, and in Kentucky, a 51%
decline in cat intake in targeted areas compared with only a 20% decline in the
entire service area (The HSUS, 2014).

Only 10%
of cats entering RSPCA shelters around Australia are recorded as feral based on
markedly unsocial behaviour. Of those
cats recorded as feral, 92% are euthanased.Of strays surrendered by the general public, 16% of adults were
classified as feral and 12% of kittens, whereas 19% adults and 9% kittens from
councils were feral (Alberthson et al,
2013, Alberthson 2014).

Importantly, trapping and killing unowned cats may lead to
an increased cat population, rather than decreased one i.e. the opposite effect
from that expected, This paradoxical effect on the target population has
occurred in other species (Lazenby, 2014). In a recent Tasmanian study, cat
numbers increased as much as three times (increased between 75% and 210%)during the period cats were trapped and
killed, but stabilized to previous numbers once the program stopped (Lazenby,
2014). Therefore, the trapping and killing of community cats as performed by
most councils in Australia, may be counter-productive. Not only is it costly,
it may increase problem cat numbers, and therefore, represents poor use of
municipal funds. Although Australian law currently prevents TNR, if permission
was gained to conduct these programs in areas contributing to high intake of
stray cats into pounds, it would be a major advance in reducing euthanasia of
healthy cats in pounds and shelters in Australia, and potentially also benefit
native wildlife. This hypothesis should be tested by piloting such programs in
controlled areas.

Recommendation

Trap,
neuter and return (TNR) is trialled, and its cost effectiveness for reducing
shelter entry evaluated when focused on areas contributing to high intake of
feral cats and kittens into shelters and pounds.

Only 7% of owner-surrendered adult cats were
relinquished to the RSPCA for behavior reasons (Alberthson et al,
2013, Alberthson 2014). However, only one reason was recorded,
and it has been found that surrenders usually have more than reason, and may
have up to 5 reasons for surrendering their pet. It has also been found that owners
may not state behaviour as a reason for surrender, for fear that it will
decrease the potential for the pet to be adopted. Keeping animals in their
homes, rather than in the shelter or pound, by providing free or low-cost behavior
counseling, decreases the number of cats that are euthanased. This behavior
counselling service could be provided through council pounds, animal welfare
agencies, and veterinarians.

Recommendation

Classes run by trained veterinary technicians or graduates
of other behavior courses could be held similar to kitten preschool class or
other human self-help classes in the evenings or weekends, to educate owners on
potential strategies to overcome unwanted behaviours. These could be provided
through veterinarians, councils, and shelters at a small fee to cover costs.

What
If.....

1. Every
pound and animal welfare was transparent in their performance

- Shelters, pounds, rescue groups and
communities all worked together to save animals

7. Healthy
cats unable to be rehomed are neutered and returned to the same area.

8. Free-living
healthy cats in suburban areas are trapped, neutered and returned to the same
area

9. Behavior modification was easily accessible and
affordable

Would we
kill as many cats and kittens?

Further research
is urgently required to inform evidence-based best practice in shelters, pounds
and the community, with a particular focus on decreasing kitten and cat influx of
owned and stray/semi-owned cats, and increasing live release of unowned cats.

Acknowledgements:

The author
thanks the following individuals and organisations for their generous financial
support for research that has assisted in developing these strategies - Alan Thiess, Guy Farrands, Norm Mayne, The
Elsie Cameron Foundation, Australian Veterinary Association (Animal Welfare
Trust), RSPCA and PIAS

New JC,
Jr., Salman MD, King M, et al. Characteristics of shelter-relinquished animals
and their owners compared with animals and their owners in U.S. pet-owning
households. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science 2000;3:179-201.